Call of Duty: Ghosts

 PC
User Score
2.3

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 3604 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 474 out of 3604
  2. Mixed: 384 out of 3604
  3. Negative: 2,746 out of 3604
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. Gravewolf
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    This game is the definition of how Activision laugh at consumers, they joke on you like if you were a brainless lamb buying whatever they do in dispite of so many senseless logics in this one as the amount of retarded requirements aren't even what the game runs with. The game just needs like 1.8-2 gb of RAM from those 6 GB that have been specified on the exigencies, 40 GB are too forThis game is the definition of how Activision laugh at consumers, they joke on you like if you were a brainless lamb buying whatever they do in dispite of so many senseless logics in this one as the amount of retarded requirements aren't even what the game runs with. The game just needs like 1.8-2 gb of RAM from those 6 GB that have been specified on the exigencies, 40 GB are too for cdls/mods and other stuff they will pull on you later. It's just a pity how this company does what it wants and doesn't pay for its acts.

    I'm guessing the next specs for the incoming CoDs:

    CPU: Intel Pentium 4 1,7ghz
    RAM: 12 GB RAM
    HDD: 100 GB space
    Video: NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN or Better    … Expand
  2. EvilSushi
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    I was going to give this game a 7 because all in all it is a fairly decent game...but I'm so sick of the COD developers not giving a about the community, here are the reasons I give it a 0
    1) You can't see your ping in game?? wtf is the reasoning behind this??
    2) The menu lags horribly..this has something to do with the amount of friends you have on steam 3) There's no FOV changer, and    I was going to give this game a 7 because all in all it is a fairly decent game...but I'm so sick of the COD developers not giving a about the community, here are the reasons I give it a 0
    1) You can't see your ping in game?? wtf is the reasoning behind this??
    2) The menu lags horribly..this has something to do with the amount of friends you have on steam
    3) There's no FOV changer, and if you do use an external one you get banned for hacking
    4) There are no dedicated servers...which is the only reason i bought this game to begin with
    5) Poorly optimized engine, I'm have a 3Ghz I7, 10Gigs 1866 Ram and a 660ti and I'm forced to run the game on the lowest settings 720p just to get a stable framerate...and yes i have updated my drivers
    6) I keep losing connection to host, this literally happens every 10mins
    7) Clipping issues, I have multiple screenshots of multiplayer games where I have fallen through the ground and gotten stuck at the bottom of the map
    8) Lag Lag Lag, this is probably the biggest problem I have with this game. Everything is so damn laggy. The lag compensation in this game is just ridiculous.

    It's a shame I was really looking forward to this game, I'm hoping they fix these problems but until then this game is just a waste of money for me    … Expand
  3. whatalameexcuse
    Nov 10, 2013
    0
    This Game is absolutely breathtaking. The graphical fidelity increased by ten folds, the new textures and assets clearly shows how much effort Infinity Ward has put in into this latest installment of the COD franchise. The PC port is especially amazing, with incredible frame rates even on less powerful video cards. "Ghosts" is probably the best shooter I have ever seen. Combining a uniqueThis Game is absolutely breathtaking. The graphical fidelity increased by ten folds, the new textures and assets clearly shows how much effort Infinity Ward has put in into this latest installment of the COD franchise. The PC port is especially amazing, with incredible frame rates even on less powerful video cards. "Ghosts" is probably the best shooter I have ever seen. Combining a unique singleplayer storyline, well designed maps, and incredible fish graphics, this game is a must buy!… Expand
  4. MrHemiroids
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    This is just a short review. Call of Duty Ghosts is by far one of the most disappointing NexGen era games. With a multibillion dollar company I was expecting more. Their new engine is already dated. The game looks absolutely horrible. Massive frame rate drops on a very powerful PC quad core i7 16 GB of RAM GTX 660ti. Unacceptable for dated graphics. Hardly nothing new no innovation. ItThis is just a short review. Call of Duty Ghosts is by far one of the most disappointing NexGen era games. With a multibillion dollar company I was expecting more. Their new engine is already dated. The game looks absolutely horrible. Massive frame rate drops on a very powerful PC quad core i7 16 GB of RAM GTX 660ti. Unacceptable for dated graphics. Hardly nothing new no innovation. It feels like an expansion pack for MW3 or any other COD game out. Battlefield 4 wins hands down. It feels NexGen and looks the part.… Expand
  5. Rhyzak
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    Poor Quality game. The requirements for this game make no sense and its horribly optimized. mostly everyone who brought this game cant even play it either because of the 6GB ram requirement. This is the worst game to come out this year.
  6. Timon48364
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    The graphics are even worse than the transition from Cod 2 to 3. I am so glad I didn't buy any of the map packs or expansions. This will be the last CoD I ever buy. I mean honestly PayDay 2 has better graphics. I thought it would be cool that you could customize a character and become a woman. I think thats the only improvement this game has made. VERY BAD GAME!!!!
  7. aurathekitty
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    This game was unsurprisingly rubbish. The optimization of the graphics was bad, frame rate was bad, Riley the dog was the most uninteresting dog of all time and the multiplayer has gone backwards! The rank system with the guns has been better thought out but come on, they put 100 million dollars onto the table, for a 4 hour average campaign? You still have to wait for everyone to runThis game was unsurprisingly rubbish. The optimization of the graphics was bad, frame rate was bad, Riley the dog was the most uninteresting dog of all time and the multiplayer has gone backwards! The rank system with the guns has been better thought out but come on, they put 100 million dollars onto the table, for a 4 hour average campaign? You still have to wait for everyone to run through their scripts until they breach the door? Like come on, ain't nobody got time for that!… Expand
  8. derpmunster
    Nov 6, 2013
    0
    This game is an utter turd of a scam. I am disappointed and angry at myself for being careless enough to purchase this steaming heap of cow manure. Fair warning, if you are considering to pick this game up, don't, treat yourself to a nice dinner or movie instead.

    I finished the single player campaign in under four hours and was underwhelmed, with hopes that the multiplayer components    This game is an utter turd of a scam. I am disappointed and angry at myself for being careless enough to purchase this steaming heap of cow manure. Fair warning, if you are considering to pick this game up, don't, treat yourself to a nice dinner or movie instead.

    I finished the single player campaign in under four hours and was underwhelmed, with hopes that the multiplayer components would at least be something that I would enjoy. I was dead wrong.

    Let's list my major qualms:
    -Graphics are dismal, especially in light of the poor performance. Poor texture quality, modeling, animation, artistic design and use of effects. The game has a plastic-like look to it and frankly looks like a 360 or PS3 launch title with everything turned up to maximum quality.
    -Performance is unbelievably bad on my high end(780, i7 2600k at 3,4 Ghz, 16gb RAM)machine, framerate varies from 240 to under 30 FPS.
    -Gameplay just feels wrong, especially in multiplayer it just seems 'off', meaning that the gunplay is inaccurate and not enjoyable.
    -The multiplayer side of things is just horrible, right now, bit for bit, I find Black Ops 2 to be a more enjoyable game.

    The only positive thing I have to say about the game is the cinematic music for the single player missions. It made the loose drivel of a plot playable and added some much needed dramatic qualities and emotions to the wooden animation.

    To sum it up, this game is a joke. Right now there are so many better alternatives for a first person shooter, both single- and multiplayer, that I highly recommend not buying this piece of garbage. Having bought the game at full retail value, I feel like someone who bought a ticket to a Metallica concert and ended up watching an out of tune high school cover band.    … Expand
  9. Grandman
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Good day.
    I think we should require money back. We need to create a petition!
    Money, money, money and more time, all they need from us, not giving us the proper quality of the game.
    We all be betatesters.
    No quality no money!
  10. tanadyb
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Bought this game in preorder...campaign see's pretty good...but multiplayer sucks... I can't believe that this game go so bad...will don't preorder anymore...none support...and still going bad with a ultimate gen pc and gpu...
  11. miknutty
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Ready for this?

    WASTE... OF... MONEY... Now unfortunately this review has to be over one hundred and fifty characters long but there isn't one thing in Ghosts that is worth talking about. Not one thing.
  12. ShadowXENUS
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    The size of the game. The system requirements... What is in the game? Is there something better that Battlefield 4 can offer? System crashes, bugs, poor graphics... Looks like the game was created like a Free-to-Play title but creators suddenly decided to create a short campaign mode and start selling the game. No optimization at all! MW1, MW2, BO, BO2, WAW this games are good. GhostsThe size of the game. The system requirements... What is in the game? Is there something better that Battlefield 4 can offer? System crashes, bugs, poor graphics... Looks like the game was created like a Free-to-Play title but creators suddenly decided to create a short campaign mode and start selling the game. No optimization at all! MW1, MW2, BO, BO2, WAW this games are good. Ghosts only a terrible ghost of "Call of Duty".… Expand
  13. Kaden
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    I started playing Call of Duty in 2006...

    I bitterly regret that i have bought this game and i swear i will never buy anything which will be released by Activision or TreyArch. Ghosts does look like and the performance if you really want to call it that way is far away from beeing acceptable. I want my money back! The graphical representation isn't worth to talk about. Just one    I started playing Call of Duty in 2006...

    I bitterly regret that i have bought this game and i swear i will never buy anything which will be released by Activision or TreyArch. Ghosts does look like and the performance if you really want to call it that way is far away from beeing acceptable. I want my money back!

    The graphical representation isn't worth to talk about. Just one short sentence: What a     … Expand
  14. MainTain
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    I played Black Ops 2 with all Settings on ultra with about 160fps. Battlefield 4 Beta with around 100fps.
    Now here comes Ghosts. It doesnt look too sexy at high details but even at ulta low settings it has a framerate from under 60.
    Best features of this game: - you often spawn under the map in mid-air. - performance on some 2.000$ PCs is so poor, that you actually can't play the game.    I played Black Ops 2 with all Settings on ultra with about 160fps. Battlefield 4 Beta with around 100fps.
    Now here comes Ghosts. It doesnt look too sexy at high details but even at ulta low settings it has a framerate from under 60.
    Best features of this game:
    - you often spawn under the map in mid-air.
    - performance on some 2.000$ PCs is so poor, that you actually can't play the game.
    - There is NO OPTION to display fps
    - There is NO OPTION to display ping
    - There is NO OPTION to adjust FOV
    - There is NO OPTION to even start the game with under 6gb of RAM (the game actually uses only 2gb)

    So i just payed 119$ for the Hardened Edition of an ALPHA VERSION GAME. Plus additional 80$ for upgrading my RAMs to a level that isn't necessary.
    There was no open Beta because this f**** game is ALPHA. It would be a Beta if we could discuss things like balancing the multiplayer but you cant even play this game anyway.
    Nice work for the biggest shooter franchise in gaming history.    … Expand
  15. Gigabytenator
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    das ist scheiße und kein spiel genauso wie die vorgänger auser mw1 und die cods die davor kammen immer noch eine scheiß grafik eine dume k i in dem singleplayer flache story abschusserien die zu over powert sind
  16. Kamian
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Ghosts is the most terrible COD franchise ever
    Optimisation sucks and too many bugs are to play well
    It's way worse than BO2
    I am not going to buy COD made by IW again
  17. SSDROiD
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    I have played every Call of Duty game since Modern Warfare 2 and I have loved the franchise very much for a long time. I was therefore very excited for Ghosts, but that excitement quickly went away after I got to play it. Let me walk you through some of it:

    First of all, the graphics. The textures, the maps and the basic graphic fidelity is so bad it literally looks like the game was    I have played every Call of Duty game since Modern Warfare 2 and I have loved the franchise very much for a long time. I was therefore very excited for Ghosts, but that excitement quickly went away after I got to play it. Let me walk you through some of it:

    First of all, the graphics. The textures, the maps and the basic graphic fidelity is so bad it literally looks like the game was made for release in 2003. That's no joke, the graphics actually hurt my eyes. The colors used are basically black and grey, everywhere, plus lots of smoke and a bland, boring landscape. I was actually looking for excuses to turn my face away from the screen, repeatedly checking my phone just to be able to look at something better than this game's graphics.

    Secondly, we were promised a next-gen game, with dynamically-evolving maps. The game has absolutely no feeling of being any next-gen anything. In fact, this can be described as moving backwards. Some of the maps are recognizable; they have been used before in previous Call of Duty titles, with tweaks made here and there. The only dynamically-changing events are that at some rare times in a match, something will fall down. That's about it. I feel especially lied to considering how Infinity Ward specifically stated the game would use a new engine, but then months later, a comment was made by them that the engine was the same as always, just upgraded. Frankly, I don't see any upgrades. This is the same engine, and we were lied to.

    Third, I believe in giving credit where credit is due. The game has improved upon previous titles in two areas: A brand new weapon and perk system, in which you can unlock items for Squad Points (which seem to be given to you randomly during a match, for no good reason) before actually hitting a required level the way previous titles did. This means it's easier to get the weapons and other firepower that you like. In addition, Ghosts gives you a certain number of available perk spots. On the perk menu, you are free to choose exactly the ones you want, without having to select one from each perk category. However, keep in mind some of the perks require 2, 3, 4 or 5 spots while others only need 1. This new weapon and perk system is an improvement, but not enough to make up for the cons this game suffers from.

    Fourth, no matter how good your gaming rig is, you will suffer from performance errors. The game crashes, it has performance problems such as skipping frames, lagging, tearing and repeated major drops in frames-per-second. I have a brand new high-end gaming laptop, and upon starting the game, without having entered an actual lobby, it even had significant problems adjusting the settings in the Options menu (which, by the way, shouldn't be called "Options" because you get no options). All of these problems cause an actual match to be more useless than useful, and you will find yourself hating the game more and more after each round. You will end up getting so frustrated, you look for something better, anything at all, to do, rather than playing this game.

    Fifth, I don't commonly like to say someone just "threw something together and called it a day", but this is exactly the impression I have for Ghosts. The game is not done. Far from it. It wouldn't ever be done the way it is constructed. Modern Warfare 2, which is several years old now, looks like a futuristic monster game of awesomeness compared to this.

    This game is terrible. It is not worth your money. Don't trust me because I say bad things about it, trust me because I have happily bought every Call of Duty title annually and this will be my last Call of Duty title the way it has completely disappointed me. I feel ripped off, genuinely ripped off big-time. The game is a joke, and a big middle-finger from the developers and publishers to the PC players. You'd have a better time staring at a wall, as you wouldn't be as frustrated about the game as I am, and your wallet would also feel better. Do yourself a favor, and do not get this game. Thank you for your time.    … Expand
  18. werttingo
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Not even gonna bother writing why this game sucks, it wouldnt fit anyway i only have 5000 max characters. Read the other reviews. Waste of money, cant even launch the damn thing.
  19. CrashNT
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Let me start by saying I wanted this game, I haven't played CoD since MW2. I was excited for some arcade style shooting. Then came the release... WHAT A NIGHTMARE. I pre-loaded the game 3 days before but for some reason had to spend another 6 hours downloading the game!! It was on release night, a night I reserved for gaming by leaving early from work Well, the next day I got toLet me start by saying I wanted this game, I haven't played CoD since MW2. I was excited for some arcade style shooting. Then came the release... WHAT A NIGHTMARE. I pre-loaded the game 3 days before but for some reason had to spend another 6 hours downloading the game!! It was on release night, a night I reserved for gaming by leaving early from work Well, the next day I got to finally play the game. "You do not meet specified RAM requirements" WHAT A LOAD OF BS!!! I have 6GB of physical ram that I installed myself. I know it is there!

    They created a artificial wall to the game, because the game doesn't actually use or require a full 6gb of ram. They bloated their specs so they could look like they were competing on a graphical scale of BF4. (which by the way, BF4 doesn't block you if you have 4gb of ram, plus it looks better and has bigger maps)

    BTW I used RAMFIX and was able to play single player on ultra settings with no problems... 6gb or higher of ram my a$$!

    ABSOLUTE FAIL IN EVERY CATAGORY FROM ACTIVISION AND INFINITYWARD!!!    … Expand
  20. Konstantinxy
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    This game is just a lazy rushed cashgrab. It's bad optimization, low quality textures and frequent FPS drops in the most random of situations are just the tip of the iceberg. The game frequently manages to crash both ATI and Nvidia display drivers (the newest ones) no matter if the settings are set to high or low. The single player campaign is short and uninspired and is as generic asThis game is just a lazy rushed cashgrab. It's bad optimization, low quality textures and frequent FPS drops in the most random of situations are just the tip of the iceberg. The game frequently manages to crash both ATI and Nvidia display drivers (the newest ones) no matter if the settings are set to high or low. The single player campaign is short and uninspired and is as generic as they get. The multiplayer took a huge step backwards from Black Ops 2 and is just as boring and uninspired as the single player but hey at least you can complain over voice chat. Do not spend any money on this game you will regret it. If you want to play a decent multiplayer modern military shooter wait a month or so until Battlefield 4 has ironed out all of it's problems and give that a try, it's far superior to this mess of a game both visually and technically.… Expand
  21. LamarrCZ
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    How you can release this piece of sh*t!? Crap graphics, really bad optimization and how this game need 6GB RAM TO RUN?! CAN YOU ANSWER ME?! Please fix this fu*ked restriction... And think about yourself Activision
  22. Horridus
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Where to start first of all, i've played all cod games with my all time favorite being MW3, but this game is nothing more than a money machine a uncomplete game wrapped in a nice package me and my friends bought this to play co-op but there is no real co-op you cant choose which level or what gamestyle you want, graphics are from an old engine (2007) FPS drops, very poor soundWhere to start first of all, i've played all cod games with my all time favorite being MW3, but this game is nothing more than a money machine a uncomplete game wrapped in a nice package me and my friends bought this to play co-op but there is no real co-op you cant choose which level or what gamestyle you want, graphics are from an old engine (2007) FPS drops, very poor sound effects, poor options settings, singleplayer is a joke with so bad steerring your soldier feels like a tetris brick, looks and feels more like very early tech demo. i am left with a empty feeling and a 2 hour used game in the trash. BIGGEST MONEY GRABBING DISAPOINTMENT THIS YEAR … Expand
  23. jamie_rocks_on
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    fps drops and very jerky mouse lag and stuttering.stuttering in menu overall unplayable (PC) GTX 780. 16ram. cpu i7. The game just looks look bad too.
  24. TheLove
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Pc gamers who bought this should be ashamed of themselves. Pc gamers who bought any COD game since WaW should be ashamed of themselves. All the high scoring critic reviews have been paid off, this game and series should be banned and deleted from history.
  25. Ghost_Leader
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    The Best COD was Black Ops... It was amazing! But Ghosts is the opposite of Black Ops, it sux really.

    My Computer contains a i7 2600@4.5GHz, GTX780@1150MHz and 8GB Ram and a 512GB SSD Samsung 840 and this horrible game has strong performance problems with frames and crashes! I want my money back! Even BF4 runs like hell on Ultra without any problem, not single problem. Im really said    The Best COD was Black Ops... It was amazing! But Ghosts is the opposite of Black Ops, it sux really.

    My Computer contains a i7 2600@4.5GHz, GTX780@1150MHz and 8GB Ram and a 512GB SSD Samsung 840 and this horrible game has strong performance problems with frames and crashes!
    I want my money back!
    Even BF4 runs like hell on Ultra without any problem, not single problem.
    Im really said and feel betrayed from IW and Activision, they promised us a great game with dedicated servers. What got we? P2P Lobbies (no servers) and MP with 6 versus 6 players. GZ noobs!    … Expand
  26. crazypeck
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    The stupid game won't install, just because I don't have 6GB Ram!? Are those idiots or what!? I Run two SSD's and have a fast graphics card, I don't need more than 4GB! that sucks...
  27. jonhny
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    If I could return the game, I would. What were they thinking when they decided to cap FPS at 91 and not add a FOV slider? On some maps it's impossible to keep a steady 91 fps due to some weird CPU usage issues when looking at certain areas.

    The lack of a FOV slider and capped FPS isn't much of an issue compared to how fast you die in this game, you die quicker than you do in Black Ops 2    If I could return the game, I would. What were they thinking when they decided to cap FPS at 91 and not add a FOV slider? On some maps it's impossible to keep a steady 91 fps due to some weird CPU usage issues when looking at certain areas.

    The lack of a FOV slider and capped FPS isn't much of an issue compared to how fast you die in this game, you die quicker than you do in Black Ops 2 hardcore mode. Maybe that's why they removed most of the hardcore mode game types? The standard mode is pretty much hardcore. I've also died so many times in a single frame when on the enemy killcam they shot 6+ bullets yet on my end all of them registered at once. Strange lag combined with this quick time to kill makes for a very frustrating game.    … Expand
  28. sealion
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Junk. Wanted so much to like this. I get the graphics are going to be a step behind other next gen games, but did not expect to lag so much. You would think with the visuals scaled back so far they would not have problems with multi-player, lag etc. The game handles horrible. Everything just feels loose. The controls lag, onscreen players can be a foot to the left or right of whatJunk. Wanted so much to like this. I get the graphics are going to be a step behind other next gen games, but did not expect to lag so much. You would think with the visuals scaled back so far they would not have problems with multi-player, lag etc. The game handles horrible. Everything just feels loose. The controls lag, onscreen players can be a foot to the left or right of what you see on your screen. Pass on this game, I would not even wait for a patch. They should have gotten it right the first time. I know which developer I will be passing every other year COD is released.… Expand
  29. d4rkbr
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    Well, I paid 110 R$ for a game that I can not play, because I do not have 6GB of RAM, cool Activi$ion you outdid yourself. I'll keep playing COD 4 which is much better than this crap.
  30. Adinfino
    Nov 7, 2013
    0
    As the rap battle between cod and bf goes,"Every game (Cod) since '04 could have been DLC".This is the least innovative of gaming franchises.Maybe with ghosts CoD may come to an end.The same piece of year after year.And finally the rap ,"The game that claims to have such a realistic dog could be such A FAKE
Page:

Awards & Rankings

9
#9 Most Discussed PC Game of 2013
53
#53 Most Shared PC Game of 2013

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
68

Mixed or average reviews - based on 14 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 5 out of 14
  2. Mixed: 7 out of 14
  3. Negative: 2 out of 14
  1. PC PowerPlay
    Dec 30, 2013
    80
    It's exactly what fans of the franchise have grown to expect. No surprises here, folks. [Jan 2014, p.90]
  2. LEVEL (Czech Republic)
    Nov 25, 2013
    60
    Nothing to see here in terms of innovation: the campaign is dull, the multiplayer fun. But this time, the air of sameness is a little bit too much. [Issue#236]
  3. IncGamers
    Nov 24, 2013
    40
    An utterly horrible PC port mars an otherwise very, very average Call of Duty game. Nothing to see here.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »